The Burkha Controversy - Now Sikhism

Scroll to see replies

well the vote is proving that the pro-Kirpan mans are correct. I would like to actually analyze how much research people non-sikh people have actually done before commenting on this thread. If it is very little, I find their views disgraceful and of little value.

I shall ask again, does anyone know how to achieve the right to wear the Kirpan. Lets look at the requirements:

-Need to have not cut your hair
-Not ate meat or drank alcohol
-Wake up at 4am latest to meditate and also in the evenings at 5-6pm
-Wearing a turban, along with the other 5k's
-Showing and embedding the 5 principles of the Khalsa within you:

-Compasssion (Daya)
-Courage (Himmat)
-Rightousness (Dharam)
-Master (Sahib)
-Steadfast (Mokum)

Alongside this, each sikh let alone singh has the duty of defending the weak and vulnerable against oppresion. The criteria goes on. Now thing about this, when a sikh becomes one of the Khalsa, he/she knows the consequences of misusing the Kirpan. Forget what the police or the courts can do, the ultiamte punishment any entity can give is God. Hence, 99.99% of Khalsa's dont misuse the weapon. If anyone assumes that any tom dick or harry Sikh can just wear the Kirpan they are not misinformed or mistaken, that person is a fool who has no respect for Sikhism.

I shall repeat again, please people have the dignity to throughly research what you are typing, Sikhs have had enough of being misintepreted and it stops now!! :wink:

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 261

Superstar6318

Original post by okapobcfc08

well the vote is proving that the pro-Kirpan mans are correct. I would like to actually analyze how much research people non-sikh people have actually done before commenting on this thread. If it is very little, I find their views disgraceful and of little value.

I shall ask again, does anyone know how to achieve the right to wear the Kirpan. Lets look at the requirements:

-Need to have not cut your hair
-Not ate meat or drank alcohol
-Wake up at 4am latest to meditate and also in the evenings at 5-6pm
-Wearing a turban, along with the other 5k's
-Showing and embedding the 5 principles of the Khalsa within you:

-Compasssion (Daya)
-Courage (Himmat)
-Rightousness (Dharam)
-Master (Sahib)
-Steadfast (Mokum)

Alongside this, each sikh let alone singh has the duty of defending the weak and vulnerable against oppresion. The criteria goes on. Now thing about this, when a sikh becomes one of the Khalsa, he/she knows the consequences of misusing the Kirpan. Forget what the police or the courts can do, the ultiamte punishment any entity can give is God. Hence, 99.99% of Khalsa's dont misuse the weapon. If anyone assumes that any tom dick or harry Sikh can just wear the Kirpan is not misinformed or mistaken, that person is a fool who has no respect for Sikhism.

I shall repeat again, please people have the dignity to throughly research what you are typing, Sikhs have had enough of being misintepreted and it stops now!! :wink:

Right you are, especially this bit "If anyone assumes that any tom dick or harry Sikh can just wear the Kirpan is not misinformed or mistaken, that person is a fool who has no respect for Sikhism."

Reply 262

Abc1234x

Original post by okapobcfc08

well the vote is proving that the pro-Kirpan mans are correct. I would like to actually analyze how much research people non-sikh people have actually done before commenting on this thread. If it is very little, I find their views disgraceful and of little value.

I shall ask again, does anyone know how to achieve the right to wear the Kirpan. Lets look at the requirements:

-Need to have not cut your hair
-Not ate meat or drank alcohol
-Wake up at 4am latest to meditate and also in the evenings at 5-6pm
-Wearing a turban, along with the other 5k's
-Showing and embedding the 5 principles of the Khalsa within you:

-Compasssion (Daya)
-Courage (Himmat)
-Rightousness (Dharam)
-Master (Sahib)
-Steadfast (Mokum)

Alongside this, each sikh let alone singh has the duty of defending the weak and vulnerable against oppresion. The criteria goes on. Now thing about this, when a sikh becomes one of the Khalsa, he/she knows the consequences of misusing the Kirpan. Forget what the police or the courts can do, the ultiamte punishment any entity can give is God. Hence, 99.99% of Khalsa's dont misuse the weapon. If anyone assumes that any tom dick or harry Sikh can just wear the Kirpan is not misinformed or mistaken, that person is a fool who has no respect for Sikhism.

I shall repeat again, please people have the dignity to throughly research what you are typing, Sikhs have had enough of being misintepreted and it stops now!! :wink:

Thank you .. at last, someone who knows what he/she is talking about

Reply 263

MrGuillotine

Original post by okapobcfc08

well the vote is proving that the pro-Kirpan mans are correct. I would like to actually analyze how much research people non-sikh people have actually done before commenting on this thread. If it is very little, I find their views disgraceful and of little value.

I shall ask again, does anyone know how to achieve the right to wear the Kirpan. Lets look at the requirements:

-Need to have not cut your hair
-Not ate meat or drank alcohol
-Wake up at 4am latest to meditate and also in the evenings at 5-6pm
-Wearing a turban, along with the other 5k's
-Showing and embedding the 5 principles of the Khalsa within you:

-Compasssion (Daya)
-Courage (Himmat)
-Rightousness (Dharam)
-Master (Sahib)
-Steadfast (Mokum)

Alongside this, each sikh let alone singh has the duty of defending the weak and vulnerable against oppresion. The criteria goes on. Now thing about this, when a sikh becomes one of the Khalsa, he/she knows the consequences of misusing the Kirpan. Forget what the police or the courts can do, the ultiamte punishment any entity can give is God. Hence, 99.99% of Khalsa's dont misuse the weapon. If anyone assumes that any tom dick or harry Sikh can just wear the Kirpan is not misinformed or mistaken, that person is a fool who has no respect for Sikhism.

I shall repeat again, please people have the dignity to throughly research what you are typing, Sikhs have had enough of being misintepreted and it stops now!! :wink:

This is the kind of dangerous thinking we dont need in this country. In case it passed you by, this is a secular country. The rule is by the law, not by your God.

I find it incredible how such fundamentalist thinking which puts yourselves above the law because of believing in God is allowed to be spread. This would never be accepted if it came from any other fundamentalist religious person, so why do Sikhs feel they are so special?

Integration my arse!

Reply 264

Superstar6318

Original post by R.B.G

If it used in defence it is still being used as a weapon. Also not all Sikhs are nice guys; obviously some will use it to attack. If they are caught by officers with the knife to and from the crime they can just say "oh I'm just observing my religion" and go along there merry way.

Besides why should Sikhs have this special ability just because some superstitious mumbo jumbo commands them to. No-one else is allowed to carry a knife for 'self defence' :wink2:

Sikhs don't believe in superstition.

Maybe you should read up on Sikh history, a main part some Sikhs wear the kirpan is to remember how Sikhs defended people from being converted to Islam.

And also represents the sheer strength Sikhs have to defend Britain in both world wars.

Reply 265

Abc1234x

Original post by MrGuillotine

I dont see how it is putting themselves above the law.The last time i checked, it was not illegal. If you have such a problem with it, you can go ahead and bring it up to the government - and then you can let them make the decision.

Reply 266

okapobcfc08

Original post by MrGuillotine

mate what was fundamentalist. You people bring to me four flimsy people of evidence, and then diss me for having faith in God? What a daydreamer. If you associate fundamentalism with Sikhs, again not misinformed just havent got a clue!!

Reply 267

MrGuillotine

Original post by Abc1234x

Yes billy, that's because there is an unjustified and unfair exception in the law which allows Sikhs to carry around this weapon with them, but doesnt extend the same rules to non-Sikhs. :rolleyes:

Reply 268

Iron Mike

Original post by okapobcfc08

Any adherent to any faith can be a fundamentalist.

Reply 269

MrGuillotine

Original post by okapobcfc08

You're putting your own religious laws above the law of the land in which you reside.

Four flimsy people of evidence? Wtf?

Reply 270

username461215

Proud to see people from the sikh community coming forward in this thread and educating those who need it - reflected in the recent change in poll figures. though very close, what's good to see is people understanding the massive significance of the kirpan to sikhs, and how over so many generations, as warriors, the Sikhs have all too often done good...

Something the sikh holy book , the Guru Granth Sahib, teaches often:

"Without the karma of good deeds, they are only destroying themselves."...

Sikhs live by doing good deeds, not bad. The Kirpan is an example of how living by the sword has never meant using it - this has only ever been done as a very last resort, when all other methods of peace have been exhausted.

And the few isolated cases that have been dug up illustrate that problems exist within every religion/faith - sikhs aren't immune to having bad people but the fact that so few cases exist whereby the kirpan has been a problem should also surely illustrate that there is no issue with the sikhs wearing the kirpan...

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 271

Mature Joe

Besides why should Sikhs have this special ability just because some superstitious mumbo jumbo commands them to. No-one else is allowed to carry a knife for 'self defence'
"true"

No. Not 'true' at all. The only thing 'true' is how you managed to get into university without knowing anything about this country, it's laws, it's traditions and it's ties. Sikhs, along with Jews, are the only two religious groups in the UK who are given extra protection by being classed as a 'race' and thus afforded extra protection under the Race Relations Act. As has been previously mentioned in this discussion it is usually Hindu and Muslim Britons who, having arrived in this country a few generations after the Sikhs, and having none of the historic ties of blood and sweat and love that the Sikhs share with this country....and thus not understanding the healthy respect that the judiciary and legislative have always had for the Sikhs....who just don't understand just how much love the Sikhs have for this country and the sacrifices they have made.
Again.......on the issue of letting the Sikhs wear their religious symbols freely on the streets of England, lets go back to Sir Winston Churchills passionate plea to Parliament :
".....It is a matter of regret that due to the obsession of the present times people are distorting the superior religious and social values, but those who wish to preserve them with respect, we should appreciate them as well as help them. Sikhs do need our help for such a cause and we should give it happily. Those who know the Sikh history, know England's relationship with the Sikhs and are aware of the achievements of the Sikhs, they should persistently support the idea of relaxation to Sikhs.................. because it is their religious privilege."
He further added : "...British people are highly indebted and obliged to Sikhs for a long time. I know that within this century we needed their help twice and they did help us very well. As a result of their timely help, we are today able to live with honour, dignity, and independence. In the war, they fought and died for us, wearing the turbans..........we should now respect their traditions and by granting this legitimate concession, win their applaud."

Churchill's feelings above, pretty much say it all. Its about respect. Its about ties that bind. It is no coincidence that even today survey after survey commissioned by the BBC has shown the Sikhs to be THE most patriotic Britons. Even more patriotic Englishmen than the 'white' Britons. Last in the survey....least proud of this country were the Hindus and Muslims. It is also no coincidence that recently, when Prince Charles, the Army, the Conservatives and the Sikhs themselves wanted to form a dedicated Sikh Regiment in the British Army the idea had to be abandoned after complaints from Hindu and Muslim organisations.
At the end of the day this whole debate is between those who go to a good university and know the first thing about this country's history........and those that sadly, do not.

Reply 272

Sammydemon

This is more dangerous and should also be banned.

Reply 273

Abc1234x

Original post by MrGuillotine

Yes billy, that's because there is an unjustified and unfair exception in the law which allows Sikhs to carry around this weapon with them, but doesnt extend the same rules to non-Sikhs. :rolleyes:

I know..and we have already gathered that on this thread, my friend. And i have already said, that fair enough, that is unfair. But :
1) most sikh people dont even carry around a kirpan
2) the ones who do, mostly do not misuse it- OP's own sources proved that.

And thats not even the reason i said that- you have no right to go around attacking that person about his/ her religious views. I'm personally not religious but at least i have respect for others' views.
And, as i have already stated, you are very welcome to go and bring it up to the government. It's a free country. Go for it.

Reply 274

ohdearnevermind

Ignorance is a bitch.

Reply 275

username461215

Original post by okapobcfc08

well said sir.

Reply 276

Abc1234x

Original post by MrGuillotine

You're putting your own religious laws above the law of the land in which you reside.

Four flimsy people of evidence? Wtf?

Look, when the ban against knives came out, no one stood up and said 'Hey, i am not going to comply to this law and going to carry the kirpan around because i am better than everyone because i am Sikh'...No, do you know why? Because the law never stated that Kirpans, are banned too. I dont understand how that, is the Sikh community's fault.

Reply 277

Abc1234x

Original post by ohdearnevermind

Ignorance is a bitch.

So true

Reply 278

okapobcfc08

Original post by MrGuillotine

You're putting your own religious laws above the law of the land in which you reside.

Four flimsy people of evidence? Wtf?

ok mate spelling mistakes i meant pieces but what chill out two seconds and jus think about what your writing. Does a Sikh of the Khalsa consider this religion more important then the law of the land. Yes. Though again, through lack of research, you failed to recognised that SIkhism actualy does incorparate the law of the land. In fact, you sound like the congress press machine that was in operation in India in 1984, making out like Sikhs were a threat and did not care for the law. Mate, seriously, dont not talk to me about law and order, when 250,000 Sikhs are not not living in this world anymore, and no guy has stood in court to answer. Do not talk to me about law mate!!

Reply 279

MrGuillotine

Original post by Abc1234x

1) Then they're ****ing irrelevant to the discussion!
2) That's not the point. The point is the principle that a potentially lethal weapon (because lets not beat around the bush, thats what it is) is allowed to be carried around by one section of society and not the rest. It's inequality, and there is no room for **** like this in Britain.

What you and your friends need to understand, is that I fully understand that its part of your religion (thought why any religion should require their followers to be armed as a sign of piety is another issue), and that its very important to you, and that Sikhs have done much good for this country, but at the end of the day, I don't believe you guys are special, and I dont think you should be subjected to special treatment.

Yell ignorance all you want, I know why you guys wear it, what Im saying is that there is no justifiable reason in a secular democracy like the country we live in to be walking around with a ****ing dagger in your pocket.